math benchmark
A large-scale dataset for numerical reasoning over financial data with question-answering pairs written by financial experts, featuring complex numerical reasoning and understanding of heterogeneous representations with annotated gold reasoning programs for full explainability
Updated Aug 7, 2026
Sorted by the source-provided rank. Higher score is better according to the registry.
| 1 | AM | 77.2% | 100.0% | 3 | C | |
| 2 | AM | 73.6% | 50.0% | 3 | C | |
| 3 | AM | 65.2% | 0.0% | 3 | C |
Top published rows on the benchmark's original scale.
The top published results on this benchmark's own scale.
Definition and scoring fields from the benchmark registry.
A large-scale dataset for numerical reasoning over financial data with question-answering pairs written by financial experts, featuring complex numerical reasoning and understanding of heterogeneous representations with annotated gold reasoning programs for full explainability
Scores are shown in ratio. The current registry marks this benchmark as not independently verified with evidence level B.
Source-native results are preserved. Eligibility for the overall LLMBoard score is a separate policy decision.
Common questions about FinQA.
Nova Pro is currently ranked first with 77.2%.
A large-scale dataset for numerical reasoning over financial data with question-answering pairs written by financial experts, featuring complex numerical reasoning and understanding of heterogeneous representations with annotated gold reasoning programs for full explainability
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
3 unique published model results are currently shown.
This benchmark is preserved as source-native evidence but is not eligible for the current overall score.